Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (58131)	1/3/2005 4:48:41 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

If you want to impede commerce, why not just shut the roads and bridges down and spend NO money on their maintenance? They'll be gone soon enough. OTOH, if you don't, make them free and pay for them out of tax revenues and let anyone use them? ensuring high value trips have priority Is THAT what it does? Really? Or does it ensure that Donald Trump can truck his yacht regardless of the toll, whereas your local red cross may not be able to afford to move blood supplies? Me paying for a road I've built, via the state, is fine. You're going to pay for that state structure, one way or another. What we're talking about is continuing to pay the cost of construction after it has already been paid. paying for a Globalstar phone Globalstar is bankrupt. You heard, right? thedigest.com Impressed me as a dumb idea. Where there are people, there is plenty of cellular service. Where there aren't people, you can't get customers. Outlaw bridges to avoid congestion? Well, I suppose you are joking, but I'm not sure as rabid Greenies say exactly that; "There's no point in building roads and bridges because they just get crowded and generate more traffic." I kid you not, they really do say exactly that. Were you joking? Hey, it would work. What good is a bridge with tolls so high no one will use it? In theory- -if anyone ever used it- -you coulds make lots of money. In practice you can't. Why shouldn't people build on excessively sloping land if they want to take their chances? Because they DON'T just "take their chances". They- -and other people- -expect them to be rescued when the inevitable happens. At the risk of other, sensible people's lives. And the gov't has to keep equipment available to carry out those dangerous rescues. Provided they don't demand money from me when the inevitable happens But they will. Count on it.